Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Gee v. Phoenix, Ariz. Ct. App. (2016)
Gee v. Phoenix, Ariz. Ct. App. (2016)
UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE
LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED.
IN THE
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Judge Patricia A. Orozco delivered the decision of the Court, in which
Presiding Judge Andrew W. Gould and Judge Peter B. Swann joined.
O R O Z C O, Judge:
1
Angela Gee appeals from the superior courts order declining
to accept jurisdiction of her special action petition. For the following
reasons, we affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
2
In October 2013, Gee and her then employer, the City of
Phoenix (City), entered into a Last Chance Employment Agreement
(LCEA). Therein, Gee acknowledged violating several personnel rules that
could have resulted in termination. In resolution of those violations, the
LCEA provided for reduced discipline encompassing the violations
occurring between August 19, 2013 and October 15, 2013. In lieu of
termination, Gee agreed to: fully comply with and follow all City
Personnel Rules, waive her right to a Civil Service Board and appeal, and
any other remedy arising from the disciplinary action or circumstances
surrounding it. Gee also confirmed her understanding that failure to
improve her record of unscheduled absences could result in termination.
In consideration of this resolution, Gee agreed to a forty-hour suspension.
The terms of LCEA were to remain in effect until October 2018.
3
Gees suspension began October 22, 2013. Her notice of
suspension provided that she must comply with the Departments leave
management guidelines. Therein, Gee was instructed that she must not
accrue any unscheduled non-FMLA absences between October 19, 2013
and August 26, 2014, to be considered compliant with the LCEA.
2
City Personnel Rule 21b3 authorizes the Citys Civil Service Board
(Board) to uphold the action of the appointing authority in disciplining an
employee when the employee has violated any lawful or official
regulation or order, or failed to obey any lawful and reasonable direction
given him by his supervisor, when such violation or failure to obey
amounts to insubordination or serious breach of discipline which may
reasonably be expected to result in lower morale in the organization, or to
result in loss, inconvenience, or injury to the City or the public as grounds
for upholding employee discipline.
1
Both the hearing officer and the Board found Gee violated 21b3.